Talk:Difficulty class
Wands and feats If a Mage who has Spell Focus X uses a wand that has a spell in family X, does he add his Spell Focus rating the the DC of the spell? Example: Gnome Wizard has Epic Spell Focus Illusion and uses a Wand of Color Spray on a goblin... Is the calculation: DC = 10 + Wand Spell level (2) DC = 10 + Innate Spell Level (1) DC = 10 + Innate Spell Level (1) + ESF 6 + Ability Modifier of Mage ? I guess any spell casting item would be applicable here. I just can't find where the DC calculation for using wands would be. Bromium 12:12, 22 June 2007 (PDT) *After testing, I've found out that the DC for scrolls and wands is a constant formula that disregards any UMD check or caster level, along with any ability modifiers or Spell Focus Feats. The Check is a simple DC 13 + Innate Spell Level, with an extra 3 bonus added onto a scroll of implosion, making the maximum DC from a scroll 25, and maximum DC from a wand 17. 03:40, 1 August 2008 (UTC) Recategorize Maybe set this article in Magical Concepts is a better place? IILikeKillAndYou *A better place than what? I assume you are referring to its category? Do you think all four categories should be dropped in favor of "magical concepts"? You need to be a bit clearer in your questions. Also, if you are not replying to the previous comment in a talk page, you should make that clear, preferably by not bulleting your comment, and making some sort of division from the preceding comment. (I'll do that now as an example.) --The Krit 01:04, 6 February 2008 (UTC) :*Sorry for the formating of the page ;), this article is listed in the spell list when its not a spell. Maybe put this article into the Magical Concepts categorie is a better place. ILKAY 01:13, 6 February 2008 (UTC) ::*So you think this article should be in both the "game rules" and "magical concepts" categories? That seems like a bit of overkill to me. I could go along with taking this out of the "Spells", "Feats", and "Skills" categories though, if others think that's a good idea. --The Krit 11:31, 7 February 2008 (UTC) Added Category: Saving Throws i added a category tag to this article for saving throws. Mysticjester 23:24, 8 August 2008 (UTC) lost by the spell saves Reading up on saving throws and the DC, the spell save part lost me. The article states that the DC is determined by the spell level, the casters primary ability modifier and the casters feats. Then it shows an example as follows: DC = 10 + spell level + ability modifier + feat modifier. Where did the "10" come from? It's not mentioned at all in the article. Is this "10" acrossed the board? Or is it only a spell add-on? Grom56 04:48, 13 February 2009 (UTC) * The "10" is not mentioned because it is not determined by anything; it's just always there. It's purpose ostensibly is to give a 50-50 base for saves. (A level 1 spell with +0 ability and feat modifiers has a DC of 11, which is beaten half the time by someone with no bonus to the saving throw.) There is not much point in asking if this is present in fixed-value DCs (such as the DC of a lock), since there is no real difference between saying the DC is 18 and saying it is 10 + 8. --The Krit 03:05, 3 March 2009 (UTC) Monster abilities Has someone verified that monster special abilities always use the charisma modifier? The other place I saw that mentioned looked like an unverified copy from D&D. --The Krit 16:53, September 28, 2010 (UTC) * It does appear to be verified now. --The Krit 09:30, October 15, 2010 (UTC) On Hit Cast Spell DCs, where should they be? I came to this wiki looking for specifics on On Hit Cast Spell DCs in general, and in particular, the DC for Bolts of Paralysis this is not a standard item, just one I've inherited in a hak. I found a lot of pages where that information could 'be, and might make sense being there, but is nowhere that I could find it. Eventually, I found a formula on the Teleport_projectile article (10 + level of the PC holding the weapon) that also seems to apply to Bolts of Paralysis. Personally, I think that information should be on the Difficulty_class article, and probably the On-hit:_cast_spell article. However, The_Krit and I don't seem to see organization and explanation the same way, so I figured it would be better to ask before I edit any articles at all. :-) (Another bit of information raised by my research is that some On Hit Cast Spell properties have a sub-property named "Level" (these particular Bolts of Paralysis are On Hit Cast Spell Hold Monster Level 7), which does not seem to affect anything except the cost of the item, and can be arbitrarily set from 1 to 40. However, my understanding of that is patchy so far, so I have no idea where that should go, either.) --BCH 02:06, December 16, 2010 (UTC) * "On-hit: cast spell: hold monster level 7" means that when the bolt hits, the standard spell ''hold monster is cast with a caster level of 7. The DC for spells cast from items (13 + innate level, which in this case is 13 + 4) is already mentioned in the difficulty class article, albeit hidden behind the word "scrolls". (I'll fix that in a moment.) What the "level" property should do is affect the duration of the hold (one round per level). Hmm... the level aspect is missing from on-hit: cast spell; that should get fixed too. --The Krit 03:09, December 16, 2010 (UTC) ** Ah, thanks! I just happened to be testing with a 7th level PC and a 4th level spell, so the two forumulae (10 + 7 and 13 + 4) just happened to produce the same results. That's what I get for being too lazy to test with more than one PC and more than one spell. :-) -- BCH 03:59, December 16, 2010 (UTC) Confused by ability "granted by feat" I just dont understand the DC calculation under the lines "abilites granted by feats.." It states that a negative ability for the class granting the ability will result in a really high dc. I have tested this with an assasin death attack, using 8 as an ability score for both dex and intelligence. I was not able to produce death attacks at super high DCs. I also tested a monk with stunning fist, using 8 for both dex and wisdom, and still was not able to see super high DCs. I did however confirm the harper scouts sleep spell producing a 127 DC when 8 was used for a dex score on the test character. is it only spell effects that bug this way? I am going to test domination gaze via undead shape with a negative wisdom modifier but i have my doubts... -- 16:24, 4 February 2011 * Death attack uses intelligence, while the primary ability of assassins is dexterity, so the DC for death attack is "otherwise specified". Stunning fist uses half the character's level, so its DC is also "otherwise specified". Domination gaze for undead shape uses one-third shifter level, so its DC is likewise "otherwise specified". On the other hand, the discussion in Talk:Sleep (feat) does make me believe that the bug lies in the GetSpellSaveDC() scripting command, so it is probably safe to change the article to mention "feats duplicating spells" as being the ones affected by the bug. --The Krit 00:03, February 5, 2011 (UTC) :* Yep, any feat using spells.2da (thus also having a script) that uses GetSpellSaveDC() has 256 added to the expected DC if the primary modifier is negative. This full 256 is never reported to the player as each of the saving throws cap the DC at 127.WhiZard 04:32, August 17, 2011 (UTC) :* Actually, GetReflexAdjustedDamage() self corrects (changing the bugged 271 DC to the rightful 15 when the save is made), making imbue arrow not susceptible to the bug. So it is really any script based feat that uses GetSpellSaveDC() within ReflexSave(), WillSave(), or FortitudeSave(). WhiZard 04:59, August 17, 2011 (UTC) :* Isolated it for real this time. It is not the saving throws nor anything to do with feats, but rather MySavingThrow() causing the problem. The WillSave(), ReflexSave(), etc. can easily handle the extra 256 by looping around their 128 range loop of 0 to 127. MySavingThrow() caps the DC at 255 which is one loop away from the 127. Spells usually can't be cast with a negative primary ability modifier, so my former testing tried it with a shifted ability performed under an ability decrease. Unfortunately the shifted ability I had used, used GetReflexAdjustedDamage() instead of MySavingThrow() so I had erroneously concluded that it was limited to feats (I had also tested a few other things that proved to not have the bug such as death attack and dev crit.). Right now, I would venture to say that hardcoded abilities would not have been impacted and the MySavingThrow() cap was a later addition; but since my conclusion of GetSpellSaveDC() bug was erroneous in limiting it to feats, full surety would need to be gained on a test by case basis. Monster abilities using MySavingThrow() would likely also exhibit this behavior. Since charisma modification seems to be the norm for monster abilities, there could be an ugly monster high DC problem as well.WhiZard 05:56, August 17, 2011 (UTC) :* Good news, monster abilities do not add in the 256 when the modifier is negative (even for spells used as monster abilities). Also all the current shifted abilities do not make use of both MySavingThrow() and GetSpellSaveDC(). So standard instances do seem to be limited to fear (feat), shadow daze (as SD requires 13 Dex decrease will be needed), and sleep (feat). Any added shifted ability or additional feat must be careful as the 256 will be added by GetSpellSaveDC(). WhiZard 13:10, August 18, 2011 (UTC) ::* Since it's been checked and the list is only three feats long, I'll go ahead and explicitly name them in the article. Thanks for checking. --The Krit 20:41, August 18, 2011 (UTC) Exceptions Is the list of spells with modifications to the DC growing too long? Is it at the point where maybe it should just say something like "some spells modify the default DC"? Or maybe try a different format for the information here? --The Krit 18:10, December 17, 2011 (UTC) Trap/Aura DC note? The note on trap and aura DCs reads : ''When a '''trap or aura allows a saving throw, the DC is set (or left as the default) by the module designer.'' I am not sure what that means for traps. It might imply that the module designer can choose the save DC for a given trap, much as he can for the detect or disarm DC. But, as best I know, when a designer adds a trap, the save DC is determined by the type and strength of the trap, and the designer doesn't get to independently choose the save DC. So, if a designer wants a door to have a deadly negative trap, it will have a save DC of 21. If he wants that deadly negative trap to have a DC of 27, there is no option to change it in the toolset, other than using a custom script. And, while I'm at it: The note doesn't seem clear for auras, either. Those DCs (once again, as far as I know) are set by their scripts and can't be changed short of editing those scripts. - MrZork (talk) 04:31, October 25, 2013 (UTC) * I believe you've answered your own question, MrZork. Wouldn't just placing a revised version of each NW_T1_ script with an intended trigger DC change in the override do the trick? Then the individual toolset blueprint wouldn't need to use any custom events and even a trap created by crafting would use those DCs. --Iconclast (talk) 15:33, October 25, 2013 (UTC) :* I don't disagree that there is a way to script changes to the trap DCs. My point is that the note seems to imply that this is a straightforward process like changing the detect DC, but it is not. I thhink that the note would be better if it were split into two notes (since there isn't much connection between trap save DCs and aura save DCs). While some mention of custom trap scripts might be appropriate in the traps article, I think the note here could refer just to standard traps. E.g. :: When a trap allows a saving throw, the difficulty class is determined by the type and strength of the trap. :: The saving throw DC for a creature's aura, if any, is determined by that aura's script, and often depends on the hit dice of the creature. :: In fact, the Saving Throws section is already broken down into notes on the DCs for various effects that allow saves. It might be useful to be more explicit about that. - MrZork (talk) 22:56, October 25, 2013 (UTC) :* The note was probably to reflect that GetSpellSaveDC() is not meaningful in traps or auras as it relies on previous data (from the last cast spell). There are a few things that use it (e.g. aura of unearthly visage and the balor on-death explosion) in addition to many area of effect spells (e.g. wall of flame). For these it would be better to set an actual DC value or pass it from the spell that originated the area of effect or lasting effect (see bigby's clenched fist) rather than hope that a later spell does not change the DC value. WhiZard (talk) 19:21, October 25, 2013 (UTC) ::* No, the note was probably intended to be accurate (by not distinguishing between module builders who write scripts and module builders who change numbers in Toolset windows), yet save words because I was tired, running short on time, or something like that. --The Krit (talk) 19:39, October 26, 2013 (UTC) * The new subsections are rather short to be subsections. --The Krit (talk) 19:39, October 26, 2013 (UTC) :* I agree. I was trying to use the existing heading styles to more clearly delineate the various save types, but the effect is a bit much. A couple of the entries (spells, feats) may be a little long for bullet points. I will play with it a bit, probably take it back closer to the original form. - MrZork (talk) 17:38, October 27, 2013 (UTC) Conflict with Saving Throw Article The description for Difficulty Class (the first paragraph of the article) ignores autosuccess and autofailure that is clearly detailed in the article about how saves are resolved i.e. Saving throw. Either the description of DC herein should include the information about rolling naturals (duplicate it) or simply refer to the article where this is fully explained because the way it is written is incorrect unless autofunctions have been disabled. Iconclast (talk) 13:53, January 27, 2016 (UTC) * Auto-success and auto-fail are features of the roll, not the target DC. In particular, they do not apply to skill checks (which is presumably why they are omitted from this article). On the other hand, the word "only" in this article could be misleading. --The Krit (talk) 02:36, January 28, 2016 (UTC)